Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2019 12:10:59 GMT -5
So no option C, where you just behave like a normal human being and tell me what you meant by "real" when you said, It can be known that appearing people are real....? What are you afraid of? It's okay if your view has changed...if you've had new realizations since some of the stuff you posted in the past....really.
Why can't we just have a normal discussion? Figgles, I don't need to do this, you know. I could have just banned you the first time you refused to produce the quote and continued giraffing. You know the rules. And if rules don't get enforced, then they are not rules. So that would have been an easy one. But it would have robbed you of a golden opportunity of realizing the tricks your own mind is playing with you, how in fact you have lost control over your own 'story' and how this 'story' has taken on a life of its own and is controlling all your forum interactions. And at the expense of the rest of the forum, I might add. This is an opportunity for you to realize is that most of the battles you are fighting on this forum (and continue to fight on your forum) are rooted in simple misunderstandings, mostly because you have no actual reference for what's been talked about here. You need to see first hand, in real-time, how you just fill in the gaps in your understanding with your imagination. Quite literally, you are seeing things that are not there. Your failure to produce that exact quote, or even a similar quote, is proof of that. And it is your total disregard for facts plus your inability to tell facts from fiction that makes your forum presence so toxic. What is going on here with you and that quote quite literally fits the definition of delusion. And it's impossible to have a normal conversation with someone who is delusional. That's why there will be only two options. So if you should get banned over this at the end of the day, then this will be of your own choosing. So, choose wisely. I'll be back in about 3 hours. R You are a very disturbed individual Reefs. The fact that others are standing by, allowing your tyrannical moderation, while you break every rule you've set out for others to follow though, is what really surprises.
It's obviously on a much smaller, less important scale, but very much reminds me of how Donald Trump is being aided and abetted by the inaction and failure to speak up, of those surrounding him.
I figured I'd give it one more shot to try to clarify and try to understand where you're coming from on the 'I do know' issue, but it's clear you have no interest in genuinely conversing about an assertion you are obviously now seeing, should never have been made.
While indeed I enjoy these conversations, I don't enjoy the inane game-playing that you insist upon. I much prefer conversing over on gab, as there is actual freedom of expression, thus, that's where I'll be posting solely from now on. Ciao.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Oct 25, 2019 20:19:34 GMT -5
Again, your issue is the same issue Reefs also has with thinking that 'not knowing' seeing the emptiness of an appearance, should result in a complete disengagement with what appears.Giraffe.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Oct 25, 2019 20:21:37 GMT -5
Figgles, I don't need to do this, you know. I could have just banned you the first time you refused to produce the quote and continued giraffing. You know the rules. And if rules don't get enforced, then they are not rules. So that would have been an easy one. But it would have robbed you of a golden opportunity of realizing the tricks your own mind is playing with you, how in fact you have lost control over your own 'story' and how this 'story' has taken on a life of its own and is controlling all your forum interactions. And at the expense of the rest of the forum, I might add. This is an opportunity for you to realize is that most of the battles you are fighting on this forum (and continue to fight on your forum) are rooted in simple misunderstandings, mostly because you have no actual reference for what's been talked about here. You need to see first hand, in real-time, how you just fill in the gaps in your understanding with your imagination. Quite literally, you are seeing things that are not there. Your failure to produce that exact quote, or even a similar quote, is proof of that. And it is your total disregard for facts plus your inability to tell facts from fiction that makes your forum presence so toxic. What is going on here with you and that quote quite literally fits the definition of delusion. And it's impossible to have a normal conversation with someone who is delusional. That's why there will be only two options. So if you should get banned over this at the end of the day, then this will be of your own choosing. So, choose wisely. I'll be back in about 3 hours. R You are a very disturbed individual Reefs. The fact that others are standing by, allowing your tyrannical moderation, while you break every rule you've set out for others to follow though, is what really surprises.
It's obviously on a much smaller, less important scale, but very much reminds me of how Donald Trump is being aided and abetted by the inaction and failure to speak up, of those surrounding him.
I figured I'd give it one more shot to try to clarify and try to understand where you're coming from on the 'I do know' issue, but it's clear you have no interest in genuinely conversing about an assertion you are obviously now seeing, should never have been made.
While indeed I enjoy these conversations, I don't enjoy the inane game-playing that you insist upon. I much prefer conversing over on gab, as there is actual freedom of expression, thus, that's where I'll be posting solely from now on. Ciao.
"YOU are fake news!" Ciao, Rachel.
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Oct 31, 2019 15:00:40 GMT -5
Well I am not sure why for years you spoke about a Truth realization that gave weight to the dream and the dream characters and you were the awakened one that perceived it for what it is / was, while poor old sleepy heads Andy and I just couldn't see what you are seeing lol. I questioned that realization from the very off. I can relate to a world that isn't separate that doesn't relate at all to a dream world but your analogy of the whole dream world was then used in comparison to the dream at night .. So it doesn't make sense to simply say that dream world was just a term used because it actually was the crux of you and E's and Gopals model .. I never said anything like that. You did lol .. This is why you proclaimed to be awake to the dream while me and Andy were still sleeping and your Truth realisation out trumped what Andy and I had realised . ..
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Oct 31, 2019 15:05:01 GMT -5
But you say you see the world reality for being like a dream with dream characters .. Y ou have implied you are someone-thing that can see through the illusions . I haven't implied here that there is something beyond the dream that see's. You are here and now. What you have made out here and now to be is dreamy through some Truth realization. You spoke about awareness not being obscured but self awareness encompasses the 'someone' that see's through illusions. This is why in the witness thread, I have said you can't prise the witness from self awareness because they are one and the same . So basically there is an individual that refers to fig's unique signature and you are aware of that very self. Whatever you make out this world to be will be through this point of perception .. You either see it as real or illusory or dreamy, based upon what you believe, based upon what you experience and know .. No. I've been very clear that there is NOT a some-one/some-thing that sees through illusions. The illusion IS that there is 'something' some kind of entity/thing/who/what. That's what has to be seen through. That is the illusion. You picked out 1 line of the whole post and answered in a way where it doesn't make much sense .. You proclaimed to be awake .. What is it that proclaims to be awake from within the awakened world reality .. It has to be associated to self .. or something that is aware of the dream lol .. Awareness itself doesn't no diddly squat about anything .
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Oct 31, 2019 15:08:17 GMT -5
Well you have already made a comparison between awareness itself and the dream world. Your not implying that it's all the same. You are dividing. As I keep saying, there is no divide, there is no divide from consciousness and self, awareness and self and yet consciousness has been repeatedly been sectioned off in someway, where the heart doesn't exist only when perceived and such likes .. Perhaps you are now beginning to see how daft it all was .. You don't actually have to speak along the terms of real and unreal I can understand that, but when you made the ultimate Truth realzation known at the time where you declared the world to be dreamy, you had already crossed the line and then used that as your foundation . If your not inclined to be drawn into the real and the unreal discussion then you really should of left the dream world well alone in my opinion because you set the president and such a president is no different to the real and unreal premise . All one does not mean 'all the same.' So long as there is experience, distinction does appear. Distinction is not separation. That which comes and goes never becomes that which abides and that which abides never becomes transient, limited, bounded. Awareness itself doesn't make distinctions only self does so the comparisons you make reflect the sense of self you have .. You have made the comparison between awareness itself and the dream world. It isn't the same, there is a divide that you have made because the so called dream world is real and you have implied that all appearances of the dream are not. You can't have differences like this and not divide because there is only one type of foundation that is either real or not .. I know that you are not an advocate of what is real or not, but like said you have set a president already by stating the world reality is dreamy in comparison to awareness itself that isn't.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Oct 31, 2019 17:26:06 GMT -5
I never said anything like that. You did lol .. This is why you proclaimed to be awake to the dream while me and Andy were still sleeping and your Truth realisation out trumped what Andy and I had realised . .. I saw this from Gopal on Fig's forum, and found it both revealing and truthful from him. ''Those kinds of thoughts wouldn't even arise to me either. But when questioned, it has to be this way. When I look at my daughter's eyes, I forget the whole world in her innocence look, I wouldn't even think that whether she is real or not when I look at her, there is a kind of belief in my background that says to me that she may be real but I can't KNOW ultimately.'' He clearly acknowledges here that in the background of his mind, or experience, the solipsist belief is present. At least he is aware that it's there.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2019 17:39:04 GMT -5
You did lol .. This is why you proclaimed to be awake to the dream while me and Andy were still sleeping and your Truth realisation out trumped what Andy and I had realised . .. I saw this from Gopal on Fig's forum, and found it both revealing and truthful from him. ''Those kinds of thoughts wouldn't even arise to me either. But when questioned, it has to be this way. When I look at my daughter's eyes, I forget the whole world in her innocence look, I wouldn't even think that whether she is real or not when I look at her, there is a kind of belief in my background that says to me that she may be real but I can't KNOW ultimately.'' He clearly acknowledges here that in the background of his mind, or experience, the solipsist belief is present. At least he is aware that it's there. Of course he's aware of it, because he's putting it there. As in, it's a pattern of thought that is now a familiar construct to him.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Oct 31, 2019 18:57:26 GMT -5
I saw this from Gopal on Fig's forum, and found it both revealing and truthful from him. ''Those kinds of thoughts wouldn't even arise to me either. But when questioned, it has to be this way. When I look at my daughter's eyes, I forget the whole world in her innocence look, I wouldn't even think that whether she is real or not when I look at her, there is a kind of belief in my background that says to me that she may be real but I can't KNOW ultimately.'' He clearly acknowledges here that in the background of his mind, or experience, the solipsist belief is present. At least he is aware that it's there. Of course he's aware of it, because he's putting it there. As in, it's a pattern of thought that is now a familiar construct to him. yes it seems like one would know that the belief is there, but i'm pretty sure that the others that have that same belief, aren't aware that the belief is there. Perhaps something can be so familiar that it can also be overlooked.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 1, 2019 4:02:55 GMT -5
Of course he's aware of it, because he's putting it there. As in, it's a pattern of thought that is now a familiar construct to him. yes it seems like one would know that the belief is there, but i'm pretty sure that the others that have that same belief, aren't aware that the belief is there. Perhaps something can be so familiar that it can also be overlooked. The real question is.. does the daughter know that the belief is there? As in, will the development of the child be affected by the faint perception of such a belief?
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Nov 1, 2019 7:12:28 GMT -5
yes it seems like one would know that the belief is there, but i'm pretty sure that the others that have that same belief, aren't aware that the belief is there. Perhaps something can be so familiar that it can also be overlooked. The real question is.. does the daughter know that the belief is there? As in, will the development of the child be affected by the faint perception of such a belief? I would guess 'yes', but it could probably be a great deal worse. We live in a difficult world.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 1, 2019 7:37:31 GMT -5
The real question is.. does the daughter know that the belief is there? As in, will the development of the child be affected by the faint perception of such a belief? I would guess 'yes', but it could probably be a great deal worse. We live in a difficult world. Hmmm.. I agree. Though this is the reality of self-enquiry and the subsequent collapse of the individual mind. It is the self that believes it can't 'ultimately' know, whether another is real, or existent in it's right.. that isn't real, and doesn't exist in it's own right.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Nov 1, 2019 8:26:39 GMT -5
I would guess 'yes', but it could probably be a great deal worse. We live in a difficult world. Hmmm.. I agree. Though this is the reality of self-enquiry and the subsequent collapse of the individual mind. It is the self that believes it can't 'ultimately' know, whether another is real, or existent in it's right.. that isn't real, and doesn't exist in it's own right. yes, exactly.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Nov 1, 2019 11:07:17 GMT -5
Hmmm.. I agree. Though this is the reality of self-enquiry and the subsequent collapse of the individual mind. It is the self that believes it can't 'ultimately' know, whether another is real, or existent in it's right.. that isn't real, and doesn't exist in it's own right. yes, exactly. As Reefs has pointed out, for anyone who has apprehended oneness/the Infinite directly, this question/issue would never even arise. That's why many of us think that the intellect must be actively engaged in this line of thought. A ZM might ask a student the following questions: 1. (holding up a rock) "What is this?" 2. Does it exist? 3. Is it real or unreal? 4. How do you know? 5. Is it conscious or not? 6. How do you know? If the student understands, then s/he could answer these questions quite easily without saying a single word. A ZM could also ask: 1. Is the world only an appearance? Answer yes or no. 2. Is there only one perceiver in this room? Answer yes or no. If the student understands, s/he could answer the questions without saying yes or no.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Nov 1, 2019 11:35:12 GMT -5
As Reefs has pointed out, for anyone who has apprehended oneness/the Infinite directly, this question/issue would never even arise. That's why many of think that the intellect must be actively engaged in this line of thought. A ZM might ask a student the following questions: 1. (holding up a rock) "What is this?" 2. Does it exist? 3. Is it real or unreal? 4. How do you know? 5. Is it conscious or not? 6. How do you know? If the student understands, then s/he could answer these questions quite easily without saying a single word. A ZM could also ask: 1. Is the world only an appearance? Answer yes or no. 2. Is there only one perceiver in this room? Answer yes or no. If the student understands, s/he could answer the questions without saying yes or no. yes I am convinced the intellect is involved. I think half the debate has been about whether intellect is involved on 'their' side, or whether intellect is involved in what you described as 'apprehension of Oneness'. It was refreshing to see Gopal acknowledge the belief, and I agree the belief could not be present after Oneness has been apprehended. I think this is just my personality type, but if I was asked a koan by a zen master, I would very likely feel compelled to be a rebel and try and screw with the zen master (I would make sure to carry my own zen stick ). I think they probably are of genuine value to a certain type of sincere seeker though.
|
|